green
Positive treatment
2.5 score
Treatment trajectory · 1992 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1992
2009
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 11 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
Sanders v. State
But see Johnson v. Puckett , 929 F.2d 1067 , 1071-72 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 898 , 112 S.Ct. 274 , 116 L.Ed.2d 226 (1991) (the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that the petitioner had proven that the grand jury foremen selection process in the county of his conviction violated his right to equal protection where he established, among other things, that in the 20 years before the petitioner's conviction, 42 white foremen had been chosen while no black had been chosen to serve as foreman, even though 43% of the population of the county was black).
discussed
Cited "but see"
Irizarry v. Marine Powers International
But See Sweeney v. Westvaco Co., 926 F.2d 29, 42 (1st Cir.1991) cert. denied, -U.S.-, 112 S.Ct. 274 , 116 L.Ed.2d 226 (1991) (stating that § 1447(e) requires remand when the district court adds a nondiverse party).
discussed
Cited "but see"
Gilbert Yniques Angel Diaz Carl S. Ramos John Balderama Tony L. Hernandez v. Victor G. Cabral Mario G. Obledo
But see Sweeney v. Westvaco Co., 926 F.2d 29, 42 (1st Cir.) (remand is required) (dictum), ce rt. denied, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 274 , 116 L.Ed.2d 226 (1991); cf. Templeton v. Nedlloyd Lines, 901 F.2d 1273, 1275 (5th Cir.1990) (section 1447(e) does not preclude voluntary dismissal under Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(2)).
discussed
Cited "see"
Cervantes Salazar v. Dretke
See Johnson v. Puckett, 929 F.2d 1067, 1071 (5th Cir.1991)(“The injury to equal protection caused by racial discrimination in the selection of members of a grand jury ‘is not limited to the defendant — there is injury to the jury system, to the law as an institution, to the community at large, and to the processes of our courts.’ ”)(quoting Rose v. Mitchell, 443 U.S. at 556 , 99 S.Ct. at 3000 , and Ballard v. United States, 329 U.S. 187, 195 , 67 S.Ct. 261, 265 , 91 L.Ed. 181 (1946)), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 898 , 112 S.Ct. 274 , 116 L.Ed.2d 226 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see"
Elbert Whaley Jones v. Gary Jerrison, Parole Officer Cranston Mitchell, Board of Probation and Parole and the Attorney General of Missouri
See Johnson v. Puckett, 929 F.2d 1067, 1070 (5th Cir.) (stating that habeas petitioner “need not plead the law”), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 274 , 116 L.Ed.2d 226 (1991); cf. 1 James S. Liebman, Federal Habeas Corpus Practice and Procedure § 11.4, at 150-51 (1988) (stating that petitions drafted by counsel “should” cite to “the controlling constitutional, statutory, or other bases for relief’).
discussed
Cited "see"
Thomas C. Ramseur v. Howard C. Beyer, Superintendent, New Jersey State Prison, Robert Del Tufo, New Jersey Attorney General
(2×)
See Johnson v. Puckett, 929 F.2d 1067, 1071 (5th Cir.1991), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 112 S.Ct. 274 , 116 L.Ed.2d 226 (1991).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Drinkard v. State
See also Johnson v. Puckett, 929 F.2d 1067, 1071 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 898 , 112 S.Ct. 274 , 116 L.Ed.2d 226 (1991).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Pace v. State
See also Johnson v. Puckett , 929 F.2d 1067 , 1071 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 898 , 112 S.Ct. 274 , 116 L.Ed.2d 226 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re Payroll Exp. Corp.
Moore et al., Moore's Federal Practice ¶ 0.402[2] at I-27 (2d ed. 1995); see also Sweeney v. Westvaco Co., 926 F.2d 29, 40 (1st Cir.) (circuit court does "not normally take Supreme Court opinions to contain holdings on matters the Court did not discuss and which, presumably, the parties did not argue"), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 899 , 112 S.Ct. 274 , 116 L.Ed.2d 226 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Pereira v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.
Moore et al., Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 0.402[2] at 1-27 (2d ed. 1995); see also Sweeney v. Westvaco Co., 926 F.2d 29, 40 (1st Cir.) (circuit court does “not normally take Supreme Court opinions to contain holdings on matters the Court did not discuss and which, presumably, the parties did not argue”), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 899 , 112 S.Ct. 274 , 116 L.Ed.2d 226 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Gonzales v. Surgidev Corp.
In considering whether federal preemption affects subject matter jurisdiction, the issue is not whether Congress intended to replace state law with a federal regulatory scheme but “whether jurisdiction provided by state law is itself pre-empted by federal law vesting exclusive jurisdiction over that controversy in another body.” International Longshoremen’s Ass’n v. Davis, 476 U.S. 380, 387-88 , 106 S.Ct. 1904, 1910 , 90 L.Ed.2d 389 (1986); see also Sweeney v. Westvaco Co., 926 F.2d 29, 37-38 (1st Cir.) (discussing whether preemption under the Labor Management Relations Act divests cou…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Puckett, Superintendent, Mississippi State Penitentiary
v.
Johnson
v.
Johnson
No. 91-197.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 7, 1991.
Published
C. A. 5th Cir. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed informa pauperis granted. Cer-tiorari denied.